In answering a question related to gay marriage last week, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said that the Republican Party, "in order to get bigger, will have to agree to disagree on social issues." Actually, the Republican Party will have to agree to disagree on gay marriage if it merely wants to stay intact. That's because Republicans increasingly disagree about the issue, with the fault line ru...

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." H.L. Mencken, 1919.

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

Maxine will say what the Democrat Party thinks but knows better than to say!

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

You are correct. Fascist is a more accurate assessment of the Dems.

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." - Thomas Jefferson

The problem with the Republicans, regarding "marriage", is that so many of them still think the government should have the primary role in defining marriage and it's associated "rules". Get the government out, all the way out, of the consenting relationships between adults.

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." - Thomas Jefferson

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

‎"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all."-Frédéric Bastiat

Really? The government has control of everything from the mortgage on your house (FHA), the car you drive (EPA/GM), the education your kids get, your healthcare, your banks, just to name a few.

Not only SS (which is not retirement) but the new idea being knocked around, MyRA, an IRA taken out of your check also as a retirement account. Seems most people are so poor at planning retirement so the government will be happy to do it for them.Then they get to use the money instead of the banks!I wouldn't be surprised if the plan is to get enough people out of their retirement savings plans until they reach the critical mass of support necessary for them to step in and nationalize our retirement checks.

Why does the term 'Socialist' bother you? Unless it's because it isn't what the intention of the country was founded on and you know it. Most liberals embrace it. Heck, the "Great Social Experiment" would be nonexistent without it. You old enought to remember people living in 'communes'? Short for communal, communist. That failed also.

‎"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." ~John Adams

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

You are correct. Fascist is a more accurate assessment of the Dems.

Same tired old arguments! Who's a bigger Socialist or Fascist the Republicans or the Democrats? Crony Capitalism and Corporate Welfare makes it rather hard for Republicans to deny their involvement in embracing both concepts. Yes Democrats also indulge more on the Socialism side and the Republicans more on the Fascist side.

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

You are correct. Fascist is a more accurate assessment of the Dems.

Fascism is a term thrown around more flippantly, and ignorantly, than even socialism. To be fair, fascism combines the worst authoritarian elements of both right and left. And generally is used as a hysterical epiteth against the party in power by the party out of power. Once the Republicans are back in the driver's seat, you'll see that they love big gubmt just as much as the D's.

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

‎"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all."-Frédéric Bastiat

Really? The government has control of everything from the mortgage on your house (FHA), the car you drive (EPA/GM), the education your kids get, your healthcare, your banks, just to name a few.

Not only SS (which is not retirement) but the new idea being knocked around, MyRA, an IRA taken out of your check also as a retirement account. Seems most people are so poor at planning retirement so the government will be happy to do it for them.Then they get to use the money instead of the banks!I wouldn't be surprised if the plan is to get enough people out of their retirement savings plans until they reach the critical mass of support necessary for them to step in and nationalize our retirement checks.

Why does the term 'Socialist' bother you? Unless it's because it isn't what the intention of the country was founded on and you know it. Most liberals embrace it. Heck, the "Great Social Experiment" would be nonexistent without it. You old enought to remember people living in 'communes'? Short for communal, communist. That failed also.

No argument that the left favors socialism in this country. But, please tell me how the Republican love affair with the military industrial complex displays their commitment to free market capitalism? More than $1 Trillion in MIC "welfare" wasted in Iraq is hard to run away from. The problem with Team Red is that they don't even realize just how committed to socialism that they are.

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

How about the entire health care industry? What about the Govt takeover of GM, if only temporary? How about Obama directing auto manufacturers to build electric vehicles like the Volt? How about Obama's attempts at limiting executive pay? How about executive orders directing overtime payment? The minimum wage? What about all the Government money Obama poured into green industries like Solyndra?

Extremists on the left throw the term "socialism" arround so loosely that they really don't recognize the dangers it represents.

Obama understands his constituents perfectly. They don't care what he does to the Constitution, the economy or his "enemies," as long as he provides them with gay marriage, legalized weed and a recharged EBT card the first of every month.

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

How about the entire health care industry? What about the Govt takeover of GM, if only temporary? How about Obama directing auto manufacturers to build electric vehicles like the Volt? How about Obama's attempts at limiting executive pay? How about executive orders directing overtime payment? The minimum wage? What about all the Government money Obama poured into green industries like Solyndra?

Extremists on the left throw the term "socialism" arround so loosely that they really don't recognize the dangers it represents.

With the exception of GM you are mixing up regulation and investments with taking over a company. And in the case of GM, the government simply bought up enough shares of the company to keep it afloat in return for the company cleaning house and coming up with a better business plan. And it work and now the government is selling back its shares.

If you want to get into a tick for tack I can match everything you listed here with regulations and investments that the GOP has implemented in private business.

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

How about the entire health care industry? What about the Govt takeover of GM, if only temporary? How about Obama directing auto manufacturers to build electric vehicles like the Volt? How about Obama's attempts at limiting executive pay? How about executive orders directing overtime payment? The minimum wage? What about all the Government money Obama poured into green industries like Solyndra?

Extremists on the left throw the term "socialism" arround so loosely that they really don't recognize the dangers it represents.

With the exception of GM you are mixing up regulation and investments with taking over a company. And in the case of GM, the government simply bought up enough shares of the company to keep it afloat in return for the company cleaning house and coming up with a better business plan. And it work and now the government is selling back its shares.

If you want to get into a tick for tack I can match everything you listed here with regulations and investments that the GOP has implemented in private business.

From where I sit you're talking about a distinction without a difference. Excessive regulation can bring about the same or similar result.

Obama understands his constituents perfectly. They don't care what he does to the Constitution, the economy or his "enemies," as long as he provides them with gay marriage, legalized weed and a recharged EBT card the first of every month.

throatwarbler wrote:Nothing but diversion. The Democrat Party has a HUGE schism regarding degrees of socialism. Write an editorial about that.

You seem to be under the impression that the Democrats are socialists. Can you enlighten us by naming any commercial or private company that the Democrats want to have taken over and run by the federal government? If you can provide details on business entities that the Dems want run by the government then, perhaps, your view may be valid. Otherwise.......

Extremists on the right throw this word "socialism" around so loosely without really knowing what the word means.

How about the entire health care industry? What about the Govt takeover of GM, if only temporary? How about Obama directing auto manufacturers to build electric vehicles like the Volt? How about Obama's attempts at limiting executive pay? How about executive orders directing overtime payment? The minimum wage? What about all the Government money Obama poured into green industries like Solyndra?

Extremists on the left throw the term "socialism" arround so loosely that they really don't recognize the dangers it represents.

With the exception of GM you are mixing up regulation and investments with taking over a company. And in the case of GM, the government simply bought up enough shares of the company to keep it afloat in return for the company cleaning house and coming up with a better business plan. And it work and now the government is selling back its shares.

If you want to get into a tick for tack I can match everything you listed here with regulations and investments that the GOP has implemented in private business.

From where I sit you're talking about a distinction without a difference. Excessive regulation can bring about the same or similar result.

We know that excessive deregulation can cripple the economy. Not all regulation is either good or bad.